You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Problems/Complaints

    How come my article got deleted when I tried to republish it?

    My article at got deleted when I tried to republish it. The article was originally published on 30th September, 2015. When I published my article for the first time, I made sure that not a single sentence matches with any content on the internet.
    But when I tried to republish it, it got deleted. The reason being mentioned is "Copied content". If someone copies my content, we can file a DMCA complaint. I did not understand the reason for deleting my article. Editors, please explain the reason for deletion.
  • #610351
    Mr. Bhuvan: Nowadays many such odd things are happening in Articles section. In my case, the posting rights in Articles Section have been withdrawn when I uploaded an article on "What to do during and after dog bite", because earlier I had submitted an article on "What to do after dog bite''.
    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #610353
    Partha sir, in my case the article was even republished twice earlier. I don't understand how come it became a copied content when I tried to republish it for third time.

  • #610362
    Bhuvan, your query has been put up to the concerned section. Please wait for a response.

    @Partha, your grievance was already clarified in another thread you had raised on the issue. There is no point in trying to bring out the point time and again as and when an opportunity comes.

    'It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it'. - Aristotle.

  • #610364
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #610377

    That is unfortunate.


    I too feel that your comment is unnecessary. I had wanted to respond to it last night but had refrained. I wonder what different options could one have, to act upon "after a dog bite" and "during and after the dog bite". Every first-aid guide spells out the same steps.

    The editors are quite clear in their stance. Articles on the same topic are welcome provided you have something new to offer. I have recently submitted two articles on topics that you had already covered under the 'what to do' contest. But, both the articles that I submitted were starkly different from yours and both were approved.

    1. What to do in an earthquake
    2. What to do when a cyclone hits


    The article can hardly be called stale. Contactless bank cards have not been weaned out of the system. So, how can the topic be stale? Even if that were the case, there would have been an explanation to that effect. Bhuvan mentions the reason that was cited.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #610378
    Ms. Juana: With utmost respect, I don't feel my comment was unwarranted. Firstly, the two topics of mine (undeer discussion) were similar but not same. Secondly, even then, I accepted deletion of my second article. Thirdly, I don't understand the logic behind withdrawing my posting rights in Articles section. What was my fault? Was it intentional?
    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #610379
    With due apologies to the author for deviating from the main topic I would like to clarify Partha's doubt. Please refer to my response to Partha's thread here and note my words 'it has been observed that you have been resorting to...' in my response therein. Hope facts are clear now. Repetitions may not be intentional but we need to take care of the Google policies too, in addition to basic ISC guidelines, while reviewing articles.
    'It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it'. - Aristotle.

  • #610384

    You are missing a key fact here – your articles were similar. I will ask you a straightforward question – how else would you deal with a dog-bite other than the steps described in your approved article. Are there any other steps that can be taken that were included in your rejected article? If your answer is in the affirmative, then you have every right to question the decision and ask for justice. But, if your only defence is that your articles were similar, then that tells the whole story.

    I am not qualified to comment on the withdrawal of your posting rights because I am not privy to all that has been going behind the scenes. I can comment only on your statements that make it evident that there were similarities in the content.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #610391
    Ms. Juana: You have not read the deleted article. The title of the deleted article was: ''What to do during and after dog-bite''. Please don't miss the word ''during''. Even then I accepted deletion of the article. But the suspension of posting rights is not understood.

    I don't want to comment upon #610379. There is nothing to comment. It is only trying to defend the indefensible.

    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #610392
    Sorry, Bhuvan for highjacking this thread.


    If you had such a strong argument why did you relent? The fault lies with you. You should have stood your ground and proven that an injustice had been carried out. I do not see any reason for you to raise the issue in this thread when you meekly accepted the decision when it was given.

    It is an assumption that I did not read the deleted article, so let's not get there. New Submissions are available for anyone to read. I might have read your article.

    I am basing my responses solely on your reactions that you display here. Also, if I am to consider "during" I wonder how much could have been covered under that heading.

    The point is that you accepted the decision. Maybe the decision to remove your posting rights was stern, but you did admit that there were similarities. Anyway, it is not a permanent ban, it is temporary.

    "A love affair with knowledge will never end in heartbreak." -Michael Garrett Marino

  • #610397

    Apologies for deleting the article.

    Note that even if an article is republished, we do not assume that it will not have copied content since it has gone through the review process by editors earlier. We will once again check for copied content and for adherence to submission guidelines since these also get updated from time to time.

    In the case of this article, similar content was seen in a pdf file [refer:} and hence it got deleted. However, after re-checking the pdf doc, it is to be seen that your article has been acknowledged in the credits under 'References' at the very end and a direct link has also been given to it. Unfortunately this was overlooked. It is good that you brought up the issue in the forum so that I was alerted to my mistake. Sincere apologies again for the erroneous deletion. The article has been restored now as approved.

    When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

  • #610422
    Thanks Vandana ma'am for taking appropriate action and correcting the mistake. As mentioned earlier, before publishing an article I always make sure that not a single statement is copied from the internet. So, there is no concept of Copied content from my side. Thanks once again.

  • This thread is locked for new responses. Please post your comments and questions as a separate thread.
    If required, refer to the URL of this page in your new post.